5 ms·
Indolent and conformist perhaps is another way to describe this. I fail to see how this a good thing. A young generation perpetuating pointless taboos imposed
by BjoernKW 9y ago
Indolent and conformist perhaps is another way to describe this.
I fail to see how this a good thing.
A young generation perpetuating pointless taboos imposed on them rather than making their own experiences frankly is a sad development.
- ikeyany 9y agoIs there anything wrong with waiting to have sex with someone you're invested in? I've found those types of experiences to be worth it, long-term. It's interesting that some see that as naive--it's the opposite if anything. Easy sex is fun but it would seem hard to invest in anyone but myself.
- qubex 9y agoYup, I’m being savagely down-voted for voicing my opinion... apparently by people who embrace the shallowness that’s the hallmark of consumerism extended all the way into the realm of our social experiences, making us mutual fungible products to each other.
- icebraining 9y agoWhy would investing in someone but yourself require giving up sex with others? That dichotomy between the unattached bachelor and the loving monogamous spouse seems to be just another of those taboos.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ikeyany 9y agoYou're not required to "give up sex with others" if you don't want to. Hell, many people are okay with polyamory or casual sex in general. I was merely stating that committing sexually can in fact be a good thing, and that the parent comment cannot speak for everyone.
- andai 9y agoWat?
- coldtea 9y ago>Why would investing in someone but yourself require giving up sex with others? Because more often than not that someone you've invested in is hurt by your casual sex with others. Why would be compartmentalizing the casual sex more "rational" than not?
- kahnpro 9y agoJealousy is a very real human emotion.
- BjoernKW 9y agoI'd say it depends on if it's truly what you want or if it's something that society wants from you. Too often these ideas are societal norms rather than our own opinions. Notions like "waiting for Prince Charming" or the one things like purity rings are a symptom of in my opinion are indeed naive and against human nature.
- ikeyany 9y agoI'm all for encouraging people to be honest with themselves, even if that honesty leads them to ugly places. But we are talking strictly about the ability to have fulfilling monogamous relationships, not the validity of "prince Charming" narratives or purity rings.
- watwut 9y agoThe more open adults are about sex topics, the later children tend to start and the more likely they are to use condoms. The earlie sex and teenage pregnancies were consequence of the taboo. Not other way round.
- Broken_Hippo 9y agoThis, and so much this - enough to comment in support.
- dsfyu404ed 9y agoTeens having sex and teens getting pregnant are two different things. There's a whole social/psychological/emotional bunch of things that often goes along with sex and it's probably better to figure that out in high-school when stakes are low and nobody around expects those relationships to last... as long as nobody gets pregnant.
- lumberjack 9y agoConformist in what way? Are you living in the 1950s? Our media and culture certainly does not preach this kind of behavior, but rather the opposite: if you are virgin by 20, don't drink and don't do drugs, you are a loser.
- coldtea 9y agoNot really. If you compared the culture today with the 60s or 70s, it's not even close.
- BjoernKW 9y agoWhile society in general today is far more liberal than it used to be in 1950s it has also become more conservative again in some ways since the early 2000s ('liberal' and 'conservative' used in terms of society in general rather than as political labels). Apart from that both perceptions can be right: That society expects people to behave by certain standards yet at the same time by a certain age people are expected to somehow magically have made some experiences that contravene these very standards. Such an environment and the cognitive dissonance involved probably doesn't exactly make it easier to make the right decisions for yourself.
- mantas 9y agoMore like living modestly now is taboo and the thing to be rebellious about. My future kids will have very hard time trying to be rebellious in the usual, conformist way. Stupid haircut, unpleasant music, unacceptable clothing, out-of-bounds societal outlooks, skipping school and causing trouble here and there? That's not rebellious at all, that's what old people did in their days. Now if they'd try to live uptight life in abstinence of all kinds, lead by strict morals and ethics.. Fuck you, now that'd be rebellious and may even make me mad once in a while.
- coldtea 9y agoAssuming such "taboos" pointless though (or the very name taboos placed upon them) is an act of faith, not some hard fact. Historically people have experimented with various modes of existence and found that some restrictions help with some things. Even if they attributed this to some religious decree, there are usually experimental results behind advocating this or that (like the taboo of incest comes from inherited diseases, and the taboo against adultery aims to reduce the infighting and pain between groups).
- BjoernKW 9y agoHistorically some taboos might've made sense. However, mindlessly perpetuating instead of questioning them simply because "It's always been that way." is just cargo cult thinking. We will never find out if these taboos are still valid in today's society if we don't question or test them.
- coldtea 9y agoThe problem is that the questioning them is often equally mindless (oh, it's old, should be of no use). E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence
- BjoernKW 9y agoI disagree. Questioning ideas is the foundation of enlightened thinking. Questioning something doesn't mean doing away with it just because it's old. It means asking yourself (and others) if it still makes sense from today's point of view.
- coldtea 9y ago>I disagree. Questioning ideas is the foundation of enlightened thinking. Not "mindless questioning" though, which is the kind I explicitly wrote about, and which amounts to knee-jerk rejection.